Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

"Cradle of Nation" Derelict disgrace

  • 08-04-2012 03:17PM
    #1
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-cradle-of-nation-a-derelict-national-disgrace-3074306.html
    Concern is growing at the highest level of government over the ongoing dereliction of the central location of the 1916 rebellion.

    The area surrounding the GPO and Moore St, where the first Republic was declared and lost, is within the theology of the Irish Republic, a sacred space where the heroism of those boys, poets, shop-keepers and Socialist pamphleteers, who took on an Empire and created the seeds of the Republic, should be celebrated.

    However, as the centenary of 1916 comes ever more close, the current state of this cradle of the Republic has been described by relatives of the original Rising leaders, and correctly so, as a "national disgrace''

    With four years to the centenary is it all possible to get to some movement on actually having a National Monument worth visiting? This site has enormous historical resonance but some some bizarre reason it seems impossible to get it sensitively restored. In any other nation this would be a prized location. In Dublin, to be blunt, a kip. Any ideas why Ireland cannot get its act together on this?


«1

Comments

  • #2
    Dirk Gently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,779 ✭✭✭Dirk Gently


    First build an actual republic, then worry about celebrating it. The aftermath of 1916 was a lost opportunity, no republic was ever built.

    Perhaps 2016 can be the reset button when we can throw off the yoke of conservatism, corruption and cronyism. That would be worth celebrating.


  • #3
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    Dirk Gently wrote: »
    First build an actual republic, then worry about celebrating it. The aftermath of 1916 was a lost opportunity, no republic was ever built.

    Perhaps 2016 can be the reset button when we can throw off the yoke of conservatism, corruption and cronyism. That would be worth celebrating.

    Nailed it. This is why I think 2016 is so important, a reminder that we won't simply be granted a true republic without a struggle, and that what we have now doesn't even come close.


  • #4
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,335 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    benway wrote: »
    Nailed it. This is why I think 2016 is so important, a reminder that we won't simply be granted a true republic without a struggle, and that what we have now doesn't even come close.

    By struggle, I presume you mean our fiscal and public office competence and propriety?


  • #5
    Lapin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,183 ✭✭✭✭Lapin


    MadsL wrote: »
    Any ideas why Ireland cannot get its act together on this?

    Possibly because there are more pressing things to get our act together about than tarting up a few streets around the Ilac Centre.


  • #6
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    MadsL wrote: »
    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-cradle-of-nation-a-derelict-national-disgrace-3074306.html



    With four years to the centenary is it all possible to get to some movement on actually having a National Monument worth visiting? This site has enormous historical resonance but some some bizarre reason it seems impossible to get it sensitively restored. In any other nation this would be a prized location. In Dublin, to be blunt, a kip. Any ideas why Ireland cannot get its act together on this?


    ...because traditionally, if you show certain elements of Irish society a stunning natural vista, they will look at it and sigh with wonder, imagining just how many houses/shopping centres/industrial sites they can cram into it. The same would extend to historic buildings or buildings of historical significance.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    tarting up a few streets

    Err, one street. In fact, a small terrace. In the scale of billions of euros does this make such a huge impact?

    Nice bit of reverse whataboutary.


  • #8
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,002 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    MadsL wrote: »
    Err, one street. In fact, a small terrace. In the scale of billions of euros does this make such a huge impact?

    Nice bit of reverse whataboutary.


    But,But...MadsL...didya not inspect de planz for the NEW ! IMPROVED ! Moore St "Quarter" incorporating O Connell St,Parnell St and environs..?

    Surely you,like myself were stunned into silence by such incredible inventions as the North Facing Ski-Slope Garden and hundreds of thousands of sq Metres of SHOPPING space....?

    Can we do it......YES we can....as long as we keep our eyes shut !!!!!


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • #9
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    AlekSmart wrote: »
    But,But...MadsL...didya not inspect de planz for the NEW ! IMPROVED ! Moore St "Quarter" incorporating O Connell St,Parnell St and environs..?

    Surely you,like myself were stunned into silence by such incredible inventions as the North Facing Ski-Slope Garden and hundreds of thousands of sq Metres of SHOPPING space....?

    Can we do it......YES we can....as long as we keep our eyes shut !!!!!

    According to the revised ABP permissions there wil be no NorthFace (sponsorship deal?) Ski-slope...

    I have posted one proposed treatment (put together by relatives of the 1916 volunteers) for Moore St over at the (unfortunetly closed) Dublin City Forum thread on Moore St..

    Moore_St_Plan.1.jpg

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77308775&postcount=56


  • #10
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 38,989 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #11
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    toxic nationalistic claptrap

    I'm curious, as an outsider, albeit with 15 years invested in Ireland, why is celebrating what many see as the birth of the Republic "toxic nationalist claptrap" - how is it any more toxic than Bastille Day, 4th July, or Cinco de Mayo?

    And 'toxic'?? - what undesirable attitude is it spreading in your view?

    I'm trying to see how a monument to the surrender offensive? I'm sorry, other than some sort of extreme pacifist stance or extreme Unionist stance - what is to object to here?

    I'm increasingly baffled as to some sort of Irish group-think that Irish history is something to be ashamed of? As an Englishman, I don't particularly like my nation's history and there have been some very unsavoury times, but I can see the point in maintaining cultural sites, particularly this one. Some Irish people seem content to see them rot. I don't get it.

    As to costs, we seem to be able to afford coloured bollards and weird grassy staircases in Smithfield, but not anything more cultural resonant? Putting a money value on it seems to be a strange thing to bring into it, but surely 2016 should be huge tourist year, and it is less than four years away.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,335 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    MadsL wrote: »

    As to costs, we seem to be able to afford coloured bollards and weird grassy staircases in Smithfield, but not anything more cultural resonant? Putting a money value on it seems to be a strange thing to bring into it, but surely 2016 should be huge tourist year, and it is less than four years away.

    With respect, the current physical state of the area is probably more accurate as a reflection with the state of the country at present. Too much is made of the 1916 thing IMO. The Titanic thing, is the way to go for those who want to make money and exploit a huge tragedy, like its something great.


  • #13
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    With respect, the current physical state of the area is probably more accurate as a reflection with the state of the country at present. Too much is made of the 1916 thing IMO. The Titanic thing, is the way to go for those who want to make money and exploit a huge tragedy, like its something great.

    Sorry, you are saying attracting tourism is just 'making money'. What a weird and perverse way to view it, how about providing inward spending, jobs and stimulating the domestic economy?? Or should we just provide more tax breaks for hotels or keep the zombie ones alive. What exactly do you think tourists come to Ireland to see??

    On the Titanic thing, as someone who's great-grandfather worked on the chains for Titanic; Titantic was an incredible engineering feat as should be celebrated, it was flawed admittedly, but these things happen if you drive head first into solid objects. The engineering and craftmanship was incredible and like nothing seen before. That's nothing to be ashamed of.


  • #14
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,335 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    MadsL wrote: »
    Sorry, you are saying attracting tourism is just 'making money'. What a weird and perverse way to view it, how about providing inward spending, jobs and stimulating the domestic economy?? Or should we just provide more tax breaks for hotels or keep the zombie ones alive. What exactly do you think tourists come to Ireland to see??

    Well Belfast has opened its Titanic centre and has( for some time)/will trade on a huge tragedy, as I stated above. So what is so perverse about that? People do not come to Ireland to see the sites of the 1916 rising.... do they? I think not. Doing up the area will not cure the inner city decline.


  • #15
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,335 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    MadsL wrote: »
    On the Titanic thing, as someone who's great-grandfather worked on the chains for Titanic; Titantic was an incredible engineering feat as should be celebrated, it was flawed admittedly, but these things happen if you drive head first into solid objects. The engineering and craftmanship was incredible and like nothing seen before. That's nothing to be ashamed of.

    Its the human tragedy thing that tourists will come to see. The engineering thing has a minor role. The tragedy far outweighs the other, so IMO its exploitative, and the 1916 thing could go the same way.


  • #16
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    Well Belfast has opened its Titanic centre and has( for some time)/will trade on a huge tragedy, as I stated above. So what is so perverse about that?

    Nothing. What I am calling perverse is your view that it is just about 'money making'.
    People do not come to Ireland to see the sites of the 1916 rising.... do they?

    15% of them come for cultural reasons - and tourism made up €4.3 billion (2.7% of GDP) in 2009. 15% of 4.3 billion is €645m. That's a hell of a injection into the economy. About a children's hospital a year.

    [IMG][/img]1QN77.png
    I think not. Doing up the area will not cure the inner city decline.

    I never said it would - but, how do you think inner cities recover? By people spending time (and by definition money) there.

    Also Ireland is badly losing ground in this regards
    THE Irish share of the world tourism market has plummeted in the past decade, despite us spending more money on tourism than any other European country.

    Radical ideas in a confidential report, seen by the Irish Independent, include flying the Union Jack in more locations to make British visitors feel more comfortable.

    The report says Ireland had 0.93pc of the world market in 2000 but had just 0.64pc of the global market a decade later.

    The study, commissioned by the Dublin City Business Association, also found:

    - There appears to be little correlation between marketing spending by tourism organisations and visitor numbers.
    - Too little money is spent on selling Dublin overseas given the amount it contributes to the tourist economy.
    - Too many tourist attractions are looking dated and fresh ideas are needed.
    - There should be specific attractions aimed at attracting the lucrative Chinese and French markets.

    and don't say spend more on marketing...
    The report says: "The World Tourism Organisation found that, in 2009, Ireland had the highest marketing spend per tourist arrival of 29 European countries.

    "Ireland's marketing spend per arrival was €7.40, or almost eight times that of France and almost 19 times that of Italy."

    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/our-tourism-share-plummets-in-spite-of-record-marketing-spend-2977309.html


  • #17
    Dirk Gently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,779 ✭✭✭Dirk Gently


    MadsL wrote: »
    I'm curious, as an outsider, albeit with 15 years invested in Ireland, why is celebrating what many see as the birth of the Republic "toxic nationalist claptrap"
    except it's not celebrating the birth of a republic, it's celebrating the birth of an authoritarian theocracy, one which ruled through religion, nationalism and conservative values. We've never had the accountability, transparency or responsibility which I would associate with a republican revolution. I'll celebrate the republic when we have a republic worth celebrating.


  • #18
    fly_agaric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,639 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    MadsL wrote: »
    Any ideas why Ireland cannot get its act together on this?

    My cynical list of reasons:

    1. There's really no quick buck to be made out of it for some one "important" in Ireland (maybe nearer 1916 anniversary?). It is a manana/Investment in our heritige/high-faluting sort of stuff (we're not really into that nonsense).

    2. It's Dublin. Most of our politicians don't really like the place very much imo. The fact that they have to leave pressing matters in their constituencies to come to Leinster House is quite a pain in the bottom really! Extra money from national kitty might be hard to obtain even if Ireland wasn't on its uppers.

    3. Not only that, it is also in altogether the "wrong" area of Dublin for money to be spent on it! <JOKE>Maybe rewrite all the history books to say St. Stephen's Green S.C. was occupied in 1916 (would rest of the world notice?)</JOKE>


  • #19
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Dirk Gently wrote: »
    except it's not celebrating the birth of a republic, it's celebrating the birth of an authoritarian theocracy, one which ruled through religion, nationalism and conservative values. We've never had the accountability, transparency or responsibility which I would associate with a republican revolution. I'll celebrate the republic when we have a republic worth celebrating.

    We never had a theocracy in this country, so lets ditch the hyperbole, shall we? And please don't come back with any "But..." nonsense.

    The ideals and general intent of the leaders of 1916 never came about. However those ideals and indeed independence are worth commemoraration as is the sacrifice and intent that went with them. It's not about DeValera, Charles McQuaid and what came after.


  • #20
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    fly_agaric wrote: »
    My cynical list of reasons:

    1. There's really no quick buck to be made out of it for some one "important" in Ireland (maybe nearer 1916 anniversary?). It is a manana/Investment in our heritige/high-faluting sort of stuff (we're not really into that nonsense).

    Apart from the whole "heritage/high faluting" thing being nonsense, I agree. The K club would be more likely to attract "culural heritage" status.


  • #21
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Dirk Gently wrote: »
    except it's not celebrating the birth of a republic, it's celebrating the birth of an authoritarian theocracy, one which ruled through religion, nationalism and conservative values. We've never had the accountability, transparency or responsibility which I would associate with a republican revolution. I'll celebrate the republic when we have a republic worth celebrating.

    So to be clear, until we achieve your utopia, in the meantime any significant sites associated with 1916 should rot into the ground, is that your view?

    By that basis, the Alamo should be left to the termites, and the Tower of London sold for architectural salvage.
    My cynical list of reasons:

    1. There's really no quick buck to be made out of it for some one "important" in Ireland (maybe nearer 1916 anniversary?). It is a manana/Investment in our heritige/high-faluting sort of stuff (we're not really into that nonsense).

    Oh really, that why the state paid almost 30m for Farmleigh.
    Nearer 2016?? Have you looked at the date? Less than four years away.
    2. It's Dublin. Most of our politicians don't really like the place very much imo. The fact that they have to leave pressing matters in their constituencies to come to Leinster House is quite a pain in the bottom really! Extra money from national kitty might be hard to obtain even if Ireland wasn't on its uppers.

    But we can spend a couple of mil down in Smithfield out of the DCC purse?
    3. Not only that, it is also in altogether the "wrong" area of Dublin for money to be spent on it! <JOKE>Maybe rewrite all the history books to say St. Stephen's Green S.C. was occupied in 1916 (would rest of the world notice?)

    :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,715 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    why focus on 1916 though? why not the actual founding of the current state and constitution on 29 December 1937?


  • #23
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 38,989 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #24
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    ...I had no idea that America had a similar conflict and situation to NI in its history. You'll doubtless be able to inform us of the parallels.

    I do recall however, that - in its heyday - the Klan had large gatherings every 4th of July. Does that mean that the 4th is terminally tainted with racist ideology now? Or was it what the 4th represented that had them gathering in the first place?


  • #25
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,560 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    Well Belfast has opened its Titanic centre and has( for some time)/will trade on a huge tragedy, as I stated above. So what is so perverse about that? People do not come to Ireland to see the sites of the 1916 rising.... do they? I think not. Doing up the area will not cure the inner city decline.
    MadsL wrote: »
    15% of them come for cultural reasons - and tourism made up €4.3 billion (2.7% of GDP) in 2009. 15% of 4.3 billion is €645m. That's a hell of a injection into the economy. About a children's hospital a year.

    Yes, but to be honest, most people coming for culture are not thinking about Irish political history: they are interested in the music, language, dance - the diddly-eye version of Irish culture. And most tourists who aren't there to be on the piss don't linger in Dublin.

    The unfortunate truth about the area around the GPO is that it is, frankly, unpleasant. Regardless of its historical importance, I think it is a shame that one of Dublin's main thoroughfares and in particular, the areas behind it are both ugly and unruly. And, until quite recently, it was too expensive for its dumpiness to be charming.

    Finally, assuming they did fix the GPO up, do you really think that it would be a major tourist draw? The city spent millions fixing up the quays, only to let them be overtaken by junkies. Having a river walk is a lovely addition to any city, and has helped revitalize more than a few urban cores, but in Dublin's case it just seems like it was a waste of money because nobody could be bothered to maintain it (sound familiar?).


  • #26
    matthew8
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,597 ✭✭✭matthew8


    benway wrote: »
    Nailed it. This is why I think 2016 is so important, a reminder that we won't simply be granted a true republic without a struggle, and that what we have now doesn't even come close.

    What do you mean what we have doesn't even come close? How is Ireland not a republic?


  • #27
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Just a quick response; I'll post more later.

    Why is the stock response to most problems in Ireland "what's the point?"

    Is it possible that one site might just dredge up enough national (with a small N) pride to actually do something A. Positive, B. Inspiring and C. Present Irish History in an grown-up, moved on and constructive manner. Would that be possible?

    As to Permabear's ridiculous contention that it is "debatable that it is a cultural site", I'd remind him that it's a National (Capital N) Monument (Capital M) - we don't recognise any higher legal status (unless you want to start talking about UNESCO sites - don't get me started on how DCC fked up that application for Georgian Dublin as a UNESCO site)


  • #28
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 38,989 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #29
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,560 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    MadsL wrote: »
    Is it possible that one site might just dredge up enough national (with a small N) pride to actually do something A. Positive, B. Inspiring and C. Present Irish History in an grown-up, moved on and constructive manner. Would that be possible?

    Can I ask, what is stopping people from doing this now? Why can't civic organizations mobilize to get things cleaned up? Is there a 'Friends of O'Connell Street" organization or some such?

    Nobody familiar with my posting history would accuse me of being a libertarian, but I find it curious that there are so many threads with people saying "DO SOMETHING" (by which they usually mean the government) whereas in reality a lot of urban renewal and cultural heritage programs in other countries are really driven by private-public sector partnerships, or civic organizations which work with/harass government to take responsibility for the historical sites under its remit, and help raise funds and public awareness for their restoration. With all of the money that sloshed through the economy over the last 20 years, nobody did this? Because, frankly, given the DCC's history, I wouldn't trust them to preserve a jar of fruit, much less historically important sites! (RIP Viking settlement).


  • #30
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    And yet other civic projects are taking place? How much do you actually think this would cost.

    @rosie You (understandably) don't know the recent history of this site. The site is in the ownership of Chartered Land, formerly the vehicle for developer Joe O'Reilly of Golden Circle fame. All very well asking for volunteers to clean up the site, the problem is that this site is in the hands of a developer still under investigation and his former company. So unless you advocate direct action and squatting there has to be some Govt action.

    Civic organisations have been lobbying for this site; Save 16, National Graves Association, An Taisce, etc. and notably relatives of the Volunteers. However when Dublin City Council issues secret contracts and puts CPO structures in place to hand this site over to a developer it is not easy for those groups to get heard, never mind have impact.

    So, in a word "what is stopping people from doing this now?" Ownership. This site is not publicly owned.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    fly_agaric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,639 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    MadsL wrote: »
    Oh really, that why the state paid almost 30m for Farmleigh.
    Nearer 2016?? Have you looked at the date? Less than four years away.

    I mean that I don't think there's any money to be made for one of our great "businesspeople" from any developments there. No need for more shopping centres, restaurants, hotels etc on the site.

    Is not Farmleigh House's main function a pad that our leaders can use to impress foriegn visitors? (i.e. buying & restoring it etc only has a tangential connection to preserving and highlighting the state's heritage/history).
    MadsL wrote: »
    But we can spend a couple of mil down in Smithfield out of the DCC purse?

    As you said that is DCC. IMO the national politicians who are not from Dublin do not like spending money on the capital city unless they have no alternative. They aren't going to fight for something to happen/money to be spent this.


Advertisement
Advertisement